Aim To evaluate the consumption of remifentanil (as a primary end-point), analgesia, sedation, hemodynamics, respiratory effects, and surgeon and patient satisfaction (as a secondary end-point) with dexmedetomidine sedation compared with those of remifentanil sedation in patients undergoing vitreoretinal surgery.Methods Patients subjected to retinal ophthalmic surgical procedures were randomized to one of two intraoperative sedation groups: one group (n = 21) received intranasal dexmedetomidine plus intravenous remifentanil (DEX-REMI group), and the other group (n = 19) received intravenous remifentanil only (REM group). The treatment was placebo-controlled. The sedation level was controlled according to the bispectral index, with target values between 80%-90%. Patient levels of comfort, sedation, and pain were documented. The number of intraoperative complications and the level of satisfaction were assessed. Remifentanil consumption and hemodynamic parameters were also included in the statistical analysis. ResultsThe level of remifentanil consumption was significantly lower in the DEX-REMI group, but combination sedation improved the surgeon's, anesthesiologist's, and patients' satisfaction scores. Importantly, the number of complications was zero in the DEX-REMI group, while eight cases of complications were noted in the REM group. The DEX-REMI group showed lower mean minimal arterial pressure, but it was still in the normotensive range.Conclusions For patients undergoing ophthalmic procedures, sedation with a combination of intranasal dexmedetomidine and an intravenous infusion of remifentanil provides lower remifentanil consumption, better satisfaction scores, and a lower complication rate than sedation with a remifentanil infusion alone.